Denver, Aug 25, 2008 / 03:27 pm (CNA).- In a statement eloquently titled On the Separation of Sense and State, the Archbishop of Denver, Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., and his Auxiliary Bishop James D. Conley harshly criticized Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, for giving a confusing view of the Catholic Churchs teaching on abortion, during a Sunday interview on NBCs Meet the Press.

Catholic public leaders inconvenienced by the abortion debate says the statement- tend to take a hard line in talking about the separation of Church and state. But their idea of separation often seems to work one way.

In fact, some officials also seem comfortable in the role of theologian. And that warrants some interest, not as a political issue, but as a matter of accuracy and justice.

Archbishop Chaputs statement recognizes Pelosi as a gifted public servant of strong convictions and many professional skills but adds that regrettably, knowledge of Catholic history and teaching does not seem to be one of them.

During the Meet the Press interview on August 24, Pelosi responded to a question about when human life begins by saying that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition . . . St. Augustine said at three months. We don't know. The point is, is that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose.

The Archdiocese of Denver argues that since Speaker Pelosi claims to have studied the issue for a long time, she must know very well one of the premier works on the subject, Jesuit John Connerys Abortion: The Development of the Roman Catholic Perspective (Loyola, 1977).

The statement recalls Connerys conclusion: The Christian tradition from the earliest days reveals a firm antiabortion attitude . . . The condemnation of abortion did not depend on and was not limited in any way by theories regarding the time of fetal animation. Even during the many centuries when Church penal and penitential practice was based on the theory of delayed animation, the condemnation of abortion was never affected by it. Whatever one would want to hold about the time of animation, or when the fetus became a human being in the strict sense of the term, abortion from the time of conception was considered wrong, and the time of animation was never looked on as a moral dividing line between permissible and impermissible abortion.

The Archdioceses statement also quotes the blunter words of the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Bonhoeffer, a strong critic and later victim of the Nazi regime in his native Germany wrote that the destruction of the embryo in the mothers womb is a violation of the right to live which God has bestowed on this nascent life. To raise the question whether we are here concerned already with a human being or not is merely to confuse the issue. The simple fact is that God certainly intended to create a human being and that this nascent human being has been deliberately deprived of his life. And that is nothing but murder.

Archbishop Chaputs statement continues, explaining that, ardent, practicing Catholics will quickly learn from the historical record that from apostolic times, the Christian tradition overwhelmingly held that abortion was grievously evil. In the absence of modern medical knowledge, some of the Early Fathers held that abortion was homicide; others that it was tantamount to homicide; and various scholars theorized about when and how the unborn child might be animated or ensouled. But none diminished the unique evil of abortion as an attack on life itself, and the early Church closely associated abortion with infanticide. In short, from the beginning, the believing Christian community held that abortion was always, gravely wrong.

Archbishop Chaput also highlighted that we now know with biological certainty exactly when human life begins. Thus, todays religious alibis for abortion and a so-called right to choose are nothing more than that  alibis that break radically with historic Christian and Catholic belief.

Abortion kills an unborn, developing human life. It is always gravely evil, and so are the evasions employed to justify it. Catholics who make excuses for it  whether theyre famous or not  fool only themselves and abuse the fidelity of those Catholics who do sincerely seek to follow the Gospel and live their Catholic faith, the statement adds.

Finally Archbishop Chaput recalls that the duty of the state and its officials is to serve the common good, which is always rooted in moral truth. A proper understanding of the separation of Church and state does not imply a separation of faith from political life. But of course, its always important to know what our faith actually teaches.

Abortion kills an unborn, developing human life. It is always gravely evil, and so are the evasions employed to justify it. Catholics who make excuses for it  whether theyre famous or not  fool only themselves and abuse the fidelity of those Catholics who do sincerely seek to follow the Gospel and live their Catholic faith, the statement adds.

Catholic Ping Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

2
posted on 08/25/2008 1:53:35 PM PDT
by NYer
("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)

Good for Archbishop Chaput. As Amy Welborn says, when a politician purports to pronounce what Catholic doctrine is, bishops should as part of their teaching office correct publicly any errors stated. I remember not too long ago Boston Mayor Menino purporting to state what he thought was the correct Catholic view on homosexuality. I truly wish Cardinal O’Malley had issued a public statement correcting his errors.

If Ms. Pelosi is has truly studied this issue as an “ardent” Catholic, then her response can only be seen as deception, an attempt to convince Catholics in name-only that there is wiggle room in the abortion debate. I pray that she reconsiders her view.

Yes but all of us dumb Catholics will vote for the abortion ticket of Obama/Biden because Biden is supposed to be a Cathoilc. Don’t forget that come November. You are too stupid to see through this crap.

I am shocked that the Bishop did not add to his statement the fact that by her statement purporting to present the Church’s teachings, Pelosi has endangered the souls of those Catholics who might follow her lead. This is prima facie cause for excommunication.

18
posted on 08/25/2008 2:32:28 PM PDT
by xkaydet65
(Freedom is purchased not with gold, but with steel.)

Bonhoeffer, a strong critic and later victim of the Nazi regime in his native Germany wrote that the destruction of the embryo in the mothers womb is a violation of the right to live which God has bestowed on this nascent life. To raise the question whether we are here concerned already with a human being or not is merely to confuse the issue. The simple fact is that God certainly intended to create a human being and that this nascent human being has been deliberately deprived of his life. And that is nothing but murder.

Interesting...I don't normally associate Bonhoffer's era with being so egregious about abortion that he would have spoken out about it.

I fully agree with the Bishop Chaput’s stand here—and the Roman Church’s position on life in general. Particularly with the scientific knowledge we have today, no Christian can claim the name and not be fully pro-life.

Though not a part of the Church of Rome, and well aware of the “latia sentia” practice (of silent, private, implied excommunication), for the life of me, I don’t know why the Roman Church does not have formal public excommunication procedures for public figures such as Polosi—a big part of whose political appeal is no doubt that they claim to be Roman Catholic.

There should be no doubt at all to EVERYONE that she is NOT an “an ardent, practicing Catholic” and PUBLIC excommunication alone would make that clear.

Putting a few of these folks “under the ban” would do a lot to tell average Roman Catholic laity—and the world at large—that no, these folk are not Roman Catholic, and yes, they are apostate.

“...and if Speaker Pelosi does not correct her views and the record, I would recommend that she not be allowed to receive Holy Communion and that she herself practice some Catholic discipline and refrain from attempting to recieve Holy Communion because she is not in communion with her church.”

24
posted on 08/25/2008 2:56:08 PM PDT
by johnnycap
(I would really like the model of Civil Forum that Warren has created to be repeated across the count)

Nancy Pelosi’s nontheological statements were designed to provide cover for Barack Obama. Both Barack and his wife Michele Obama are followers of Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton, who has no problem putting down children born with defects or elderly people who are unable to care for themselves, and apparently wants to allow parents to abort children up through their fourth birthday for any reason or no reason at all.

When the leaders of the Democratic Party gather in Denver for their nominating convention, they'll hear from a number of prominent religious leaders. They'll hear from several prominent Catholics, too. But they won't hear from the Archbishop of Denver, points out Julia Duin of theWashington Times.

Archbishop Charles Chaput would be a very, very interesting convention speaker. He's intelligent, witty, modest, and thoughtful. He has taken a special interest in the relationship between religion and politics, as demonstrated by his new book, Render Unto Caesar.

But if you were a Democratic leader if you were a supporter of Senator Obama would you want to hand Archbishop Chaput the microphone? Nope. His message would not be congenial to the "pro-choice" crowd.

Ray Flynn, former Boston mayor and later US ambassador to the Vatican, tells the Washington Times that the failure to include Archbishop Chaput is "a serious oversight" on the part of Democratic Party leaders. Serious, yes. Oversight, no.

All of these CINO’S are still receiving Communion? The directive needs to come directly from the Pope: immediate ex-communication for any politician supporting unrestricted abortion and partial birth abortion because this handing it off to the Bishops is not working. Oh, I am making too much sense and sense will never prevail in this case./Just Asking - seoul62......

**I would recommend that she not be allowed to receive Holy Communion and that she herself practice some Catholic discipline and refrain from attempting to recieve Holy Communion because she is not in communion with her church.**

You are correct. She has excommunicated herself and can no longer be communicated. (Receive Communion.)

Nancy is an apostate who has excommunicated herself by embracing a grave evil and then compounding that by lying about the position of the Catholic Church. Any Priest offering Nancy communion compounds that evil once again by endorsing her warped theology.

You've gotten right at the heart of her comments. In effect she is saying, "No matter if it is a life or not, my support for a woman's right to end it remains."

That is more horrifying than having her leave it at a mystery. Now she is admitting that she is fine with possibility of the destruction of life. Doesn't matter either way to her.

Obama is the same - he claims to have no idea when life begins. 50/50 chance that it is murder, but he'll support it anyway. Going a step further, he says, even if the aborted baby moves (he or she is alive) it is not worth saving.

Forget about 'No blood for oil' The Dems are willing to give the blood of infants for expediency and votes/power.

Maybe Rev Wright is right... G-D America if this stands. I would see no reason for Him to bless her.

I am shocked that the Bishop did not add to his statement the fact that by her statement purporting to present the Churchs teachings,

I believe he covered that with the following statement:

Abortion kills an unborn, developing human life. It is always gravely evil, and so are the evasions employed to justify it. Catholics who make excuses for it  whether theyre famous or not  fool only themselves and abuse the fidelity of those Catholics who do sincerely seek to follow the Gospel and live their Catholic faith, the statement adds.

43
posted on 08/25/2008 4:06:01 PM PDT
by NYer
("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)

I dont know why the Roman Church does not have formal public excommunication procedures for public figures such as Polosi

Because our Lord came for the sinners. What good is accomplished by tossing them out of the Church. The proper and most Christ like approach is to correct them - first in private then, if necessary, publicly. The bishop is following in the footsteps of Christ, the Shepherd.

45
posted on 08/25/2008 4:12:08 PM PDT
by NYer
("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)

Both Barack and his wife Michele Obama are followers of Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton, who has no problem putting down children born with defects or elderly people who are unable to care for themselves, and apparently wants to allow parents to abort children up through their fourth birthday for any reason or no reason at all.

Yes ... I have heard this. Can you provide links to more detailed connections between the two? I have also read that one of Obama's major financial backers (is it also Singer?) is seeking to postpone the issuance of children's birth certificates for up to 2 years ... just in case .... the child has a life threatening birth defect or illness. This would then preclude the necessity to issue formal death certificates. They could simply terminate the child's life, as if it had never been born. What do you know of this?

46
posted on 08/25/2008 4:19:26 PM PDT
by NYer
("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)

Because our Lord came for the sinners. What good is accomplished by tossing them out of the Church.

Agreed, Jesus did come to save us sinners. However, our Lord clearly indicated that eventually...if someone who claims to be a brother (or sister) is intransigent, and won't be corrected privately or publicly, than they must be thrown out of the Church...and this must be public.

Pelosi and other politicians like her--who base their careers on being pro-abortion AND Roman Catholic fit this description perfectly.

"If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector." (Matt. 18:15-17)

Oddly enough this passage is immediately followed by one commonly attributed to establish Roman Catholic authority: "I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.